The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

The way I understood it, the authors are making the case that it was much more than a "mere" surgical strike; that the term "surgical strike", as it is colloquially used, does not do the operation justice. I'm quite okay with them writing that.

Mihir wrote:The way I understood it, the authors are making the case that it was much more than a "mere" surgical strike; that the term "surgical strike", as it is colloquially used, does not do the operation justice. I'm quite okay with them writing that.

You just innocently fell victim as intended by the article's authors. Couched in the high praise are constant innuendos about why it wasn't a surgical strike, why it was nothing special, why it was mostly empty huts blah blah blah. It's a very cunning sophisticated piece of writing and clearly not the work of a single individual. It's a result of multiple iterations to ensure each sentence is couched in terms which downplay the actual event and what was achieved. Given the eagerness of such media and our politicians to piss on their own country, India is truly a basket of crabs.

rohitvats wrote:This is especially for Singha - Video of unarmed combat demo in the IA. This one seems to have been shot on a mobile phone. Pretty interesting stuff. The point where he snatches the pistol from the opponent is quite slick.

The article did exactly that - and starts talking about soldiers laboriously going in and their actions, though successful, not fitting in with the Macmillan dictionary definition that these Einsteins chose to quote thereby indicating that the people who described the mission did not know exactly what they did, but between the dictionary and these authors the truth has been laid threadbare. And the operation was a success. Thank you.

What did I learn that I did not know from earlier reports? Let me answer that. I learned that the Macmillan dictionary defines surgical strike in a particular way. The authors believe that and are saying "Although some action occurred it was not a surgical strike. And we declare it a success." Oh yeah?

What was the point of the article again?

The act of nitpicking and showing that X's grasp of English is better that others is one of the most irritating things that I find among English speaking people and media in India

rohitvats wrote:This is especially for Singha - Video of unarmed combat demo in the IA. This one seems to have been shot on a mobile phone. Pretty interesting stuff. The point where he snatches the pistol from the opponent is quite slick.

Noob poonch, have never been got an exposure to such martial arts. But always had a doubt, the weight of the opponent does play a role I believe. Can a 70kg commando/person disarm and flip say a 95kg opponent like that? i'd believe just speed may not be able to accomplish that.

RB, I didn't see too many innuendos about how it wasn't special. In fact, there's a direct quote form a senior officer who says it was unprecedented. It also discusses how the political leadership, much to its credit, cut through the red tape and quickly made available the intel that was necessary for such a strike. It also makes the case that the deception operation that preceded the strike was superbly executed. Also note that one of the authors, Ajit Kumar Dubey, comes across as a 400% jingo on Twitter!

If I "fell victim" to what was clearly a piece of propagandu, then the authors clearly failed and ended up achieving the exact opposite of what they intended. My takeaway was that it was a brilliant operation, and would not have been possible without the close co-ordination and painstaking prep work that was done beforehand.

Mihir wrote:RB, I didn't see too many innuendos about how it wasn't special. In fact, there's a direct quote form a senior officer who says it was unprecedented. It also discusses how the political leadership, much to its credit, cut through the red tape and quickly made available the intel that was necessary for such a strike. It also makes the case that the deception operation that preceded the strike was superbly executed. Also note that one of the authors, Ajit Kumar Dubey, comes across as a 400% jingo on Twitter!

If I "fell victim" to what was clearly a piece of propagandu, then the authors clearly failed and ended up achieving the exact opposite of what they intended. My takeaway was that it was a brilliant operation, and would not have been possible without the close co-ordination and painstaking prep work that was done beforehand.

In any case, I'm belabouring the point. Let's just agree to disagree.

Mihir, that line about troops not knowing militants would be armed, since they are given that just before slipping over. As if..what else is a launchpad? That was clearly BS. Rest of the article may have been OK but somebody has tried to pull a fast one on the journos and they fell for it.

The trick is to use the opponents momentum and as Gus says be aware of leverage points. For example your extended arm is weak, when you hit hip momentum must come into play. Gun disarm - always reduce gap, closer you are the better , knife increase distance. When knife is at neck pivot away in opposite direction to protect neck.

Except for SF and very highly trained in UAC always avoid UAC. It's highly unpredictable. When in it go for max damage. No holds barred. Destroy the enemy. Again except SF. If you are SF you can aim to capture one on one. Normal soldiers - don't try these stunts. Hit and kill unless there is are many to one. Then you can capture.

The guy has immense hand & upper body strength. He has thrown the partner from stationary position so not so much of momentum play. While the partner were not lifted up high, he was definitely lifted off the ground in the process of throwing.The way he puts pressure in the wrists, fingers etc corroborates the same.

The demo partner is cooperating too. the instructor is very good no doubt. But less question of strength even from stationary position and more of technique. UAC is all technique given a basic level of fitness which all these troops will have. Trust me I've been there - on the receiving end. And I have seen many many times 'strength' guys sorted out by masters of the art. I love the way how he stops the demo partner from quickly conceding by moving his fingers. Demo partner had his SOP figured out - moment he hits Mother Earth concede. But the instructor sorted him out with panache. Really good video.

Good no-shout discussion on ramifications of Surgical Strike. First six and a half minutes cover major terrorist strikes/hijacks since IC 814.

Participants:

Ajay Sahni (Founding Member & Executive Director of the Institute for Conflict Management):- Diplomatic and Strategic impact.- No more military action is required except symbolic to keep it below war threshold.- Nawaj Sharif is speaking language of Modi after this, wants to reduce poverty. Trying to bring back India to table, but even after talks Pak won’t dismantle the camps.- India has to put costs on Pak in all spheres and not reduce the pressure.- Change IWT, revoke MFN. - Don’t go in covert way though (as it always has a blow back). Overt is better.

Kanwal Sibal(career diplomat who retired as Foreign Secretary to the GoI):- Happy that India broke self-imposed psychological barrier. - Opened up a host of choices for acting and hurting Pak.- Sends a signal by saying ‘surgical strike’, that India is doing what US is doing.- Pak downplaying due to H&D issues of army and especially of Raheel Sharif.- India should not fall into ‘dialogue/talk’ trap again.- Good step on raising Balochistan issue.- If they give asylum to Dawood, Khalistan then why couldn’t we give to Bugti?- Excellent handling of Saarc for deriding terrorism.

Brahma Chellany(Strategic thinker, author, public intellectual and analyst of international geo-strategic trends. He remains active, however, in Track I and Track II dialogues.):- Why didn’t India react after Pathankot, Jalabad, Mazar-e-Sherif, Herat?- Talks about unprecedented access to Pathankot to Pak Security agencies.- After Uri got GoI under tremendous pressure.- Although limited operation military operation with limited benefits but has much bigger geo-political, strategic and psychological benefits.- Shouldn’t be one off operation. India needs to keep up pressure, can’t go back to passive posture.- Can’t flip-flop on Pak policy anymore, which had been going on for decades.- Use the water card.- We have to put pressure on Pak from its Western side.

Picklu wrote:The guy has immense hand & upper body strength. He has thrown the partner from stationary position so not so much of momentum play. While the partner were not lifted up high, he was definitely lifted off the ground in the process of throwing.The way he puts pressure in the wrists, fingers etc corroborates the same.

He is fit no doubt but I don't think he has freakish strength for his body type. It's all technique practiced 1000s of time till its muscle memory. Even for us ITvity flabby tabbys, think about how you lift weights in the gym. How do you execute a deadlift or a dumbbell bench press or a squat. Or how a 65 year old porter woman in the Himalayas lifts and carries 100Kg of load up and down class 2 terrain. It is good fitness with excellent technique and eons of practice. Brute strength just won't cut it. I won't be surprised if the instructor is an ustaad in aikido. My aunt who is 90lb soaking wet could easily hurl me across a room despite me weighing almost 2x. In brute strength she was no match for me and I could easily pin her down but if she was standing in any way and got hold of my wrist or lower arm, I was raakitmard.

Mihir wrote:RB, I didn't see too many innuendos about how it wasn't special. In fact, there's a direct quote form a senior officer who says it was unprecedented. It also discusses how the political leadership, much to its credit, cut through the red tape and quickly made available the intel that was necessary for such a strike. It also makes the case that the deception operation that preceded the strike was superbly executed. Also note that one of the authors, Ajit Kumar Dubey, comes across as a 400% jingo on Twitter!

If I "fell victim" to what was clearly a piece of propagandu, then the authors clearly failed and ended up achieving the exact opposite of what they intended. My takeaway was that it was a brilliant operation, and would not have been possible without the close co-ordination and painstaking prep work that was done beforehand.

In any case, I'm belabouring the point. Let's just agree to disagree.

Mihir, I think you missed my point. What is the probability that you would FB like that article or fwd/tweet it to friends? If it's high then you have fallen victim. If it's low then yes they have failed. This type of article is exactly opposite of the Big Bang No surgery happened type hot air that the Paki media is outgassing. This type of article is all about subtly changing the narrative....dhimmitude by a 1000 dilutions. More these articles gets propagated and archived, more they succeed in recording the diluted bogus narrative they want as authentic history, to be used later on when people's memories have faded and historical precedents belong to those who were most cited (no different than how Chacha did his original PageRank). Like someone said, maybe the DDMs got taken for a ride though I am a bit more inclined to believe it's deliberately written that way. But that is immaterial here.

Agree, an extremely clever bit of writing. It is classic puff pastry. You mention a few undeniable facts that everyone knows which give the whole thing a crisp patina of credibility and inside you stuff it with a bland mixture of alu instead of meat and watered down sauce. You then bake the whole thing in a language that creates a shiny, golden look that deceives most casual punters.

By the end of the piece, the attack has been reduced to three camps with only thirty or so 'boys' killed, mostly unarmed. The attackers were three times as many, armed with the latest and greatest and with the support of the entire force of the Indian Army behind them.

3) From there, the trained boys are taken to the launchpads, where they spend days until the coast is clear for infiltration.

4) How did the commandos get to know of the tracks? “Didn’t you know of the guides on the LoC?” asked an officer. “There are local villagers who help the infiltrators. They also help us. Some are from our side; some from the other.”

5) The commandos knew one thing for sure. The boys at the launchpads would not be armed. (Boys and not terrorists. Second time using this nomenclature)

6) The most realistic estimate is that about 30 were killed in three launchpads.

Actually the first clue should be enough to stop reading. Imagine, if some of us at BRF are taken in by this article, what of the fence sitters eh!

Maybe, Right Wing? I think Yagnasri was at a RSS shakha or something similar.

"RW" usually stands for "Real World". It is an abbreviation that first got set in "Second Life", a simulated, VR type environment developed by IBM labs (to cut-down on travel costs, IBM peeps would 'meet' in 'SL" as opposed to the "RW" which would require travel).

This is not a training video, it is only a demonstration. In a training scenario, there'd be one technique demonstrated at a time, and then repeated practice of that one technique, to develop proficiency. IMO this was one guy who was tasked with "putting on a show" and he did a fine job just below the threshold of injuring that "victim, er I mean volunteer". Frankly, I don't think he could have performed this demonstration outside of a military context because anywhere else he'd either get sued, or he would have torn the guy's shoulder completely out.

I can tell his "volunteer" isn't accustomed to this training, because he isn't landing correctly, did no "break-falls", has a poor defensive posture and bad stance; i.e. he is untrained, which is why it's dangerous for him, which is my major complaint with what I saw. I hope that shoulder isn't badly hurt, because that kind of over-extension can make one prone to shoulder dislocations, which can be fatal in a combat situation or even while swimming. NB: There is a proper way to fall, and this guy hasn't been taught even that much; which is why I've gotta frown upon this 3/4 speed demonstration of what are some rather kinetic techniques. BTW this is classic "small circle" and "medium circle" Jiu Jitsu of the "Haku Ryu" and "Juku Ryu" schools; varieties that have been standard syllabus for SF since at least WWII.

Karthik S wrote:

rohitvats wrote:This is especially for Singha - Video of unarmed combat demo in the IA. This one seems to have been shot on a mobile phone. Pretty interesting stuff. The point where he snatches the pistol from the opponent is quite slick.

Noob poonch, have never been got an exposure to such martial arts. But always had a doubt, the weight of the opponent does play a role I believe. Can a 70kg commando/person disarm and flip say a 95kg opponent like that? i'd believe just speed may not be able to accomplish that.

What the video does not show clearly is the exquisite pain of having one's wrist and elbow and shoulder joints 'divided' in the process of a well executed wrist throw or shoulder take-down. When the correct technique is applied, even by someone weighing let's say 60kg, upon someone who weighs 100kg; it's not a matter of stacking up one's weight directly against the entire mass of your opponent's weight. Rather, technique is highly concentrated force, often twisting forces against wrists, elbows and shoulders combined with sweeping forces against legs; applied against anatomical weaknesses or weak points in posture thereby causing excruciating pain/injury which produces the movement leading to the throw, take-down and submission/lock.

The reality, the 'RW' is that if the 100kg attacker naively goes up against the 60kg master; to stay standing he must be able to overlook the pain when his wrist is broken and his hand is torn-off the jagged stump of his radial bone, which I suppose is possible if the attacker is hopped-up on PCP or some such. (Nonetheless, that wrist can still be broken, PCP or no).

No doubt, a master would recognize this and perform a more severe technique as required.

Without the PCP, an attacker is going to react to the pain, and that reaction is what robs him of balance. Once he is sufficiently off-balance, it takes very little force to effectively knock him into the air, even if only by a height of millimeters; and once he's there, a rapid swing or sweep of the ensnared limb, and voila, an itty-bitty person can throw a giant of a man clear across the room. That's basically how it works.

NB: When buddy the "volunteer" is tapping on the mat, he's not just conceding the fight, he's begging for mercy from the pain he's feeling. The harder and faster he pounds the mat, that's a good indication of how well the technique is working, i.e. how badly it hurts. It may not be apparent from the video, but when joints are manipulated beyond their normal range of motion, the tearing of ligaments, crushing of cartilage and ripping of muscle fibers quickly produces piercing pain. It is this pain that produces concession, submission and defeat.

IOW if the buddy is 'playing along' with the demonstration, it's only in an effort to not have his wrist broken, his elbow hyper-extended or his shoulder dislocated or even separated. That exquisite pain comes on in a flash, and to lessen it, one is physically obliged to contort one's self and bend-over and land wherever one is thrown. The pain is the key -- it makes everything else possible, and it's why a 60kg person can defeat someone more than twice his or her weight.

NB: That sentry stalking technique (sneaking-up from behind and attacking from the rear) is troubling to see 'in the open'. IMO it's irresponsible to have demonstrated those techniques at that speed with the untrained or poorly trained buddy, and it's worse yet to film it and put it on Youtube for all and sundry. No doubt, the instructor knows well enough not to be too rough on the guy's throat so his buddy survives it. However, once this goes up on Youtube and some amateur tries this at home with his little brother, little brother could easily end-up dead.

OF NOTE: When the IA proclaimed 'total surprise' of surgical strikes carried-out by SF, I well-imagined that this was how the sentries were quietly neutralized, so that Claymores could be laid and firing-positions could be taken, all before all those launchpads were set ablaze.

Don't try that at home folks!

(It's dangerous to train in such things without proper supervision, and so I'd like to discourage anyone from trying these things outside of the proper setting.)

One last point: If ever you've gotta hold someone at gunpoint, don't disadvantage yourself by bringing the weapon close to the person you're holding it on. The whole advantage of the gun is you can keep a stand-off distance. Bringing the gun close like that is asking for it to be taken from you. Never hold the gun with extended arms if the person you're holding it on is in a position to grab it. For this reason I used the term 'naive attacker' above. I don't mean to disparage anyone, just pointing out what I saw.

Its not necessary for you (even if you are heavier) to be physically lifted a few feet off the ground. Its sufficient for your feet to be swept off the ground by a few centimeters and you will land with a thud. In such a situation, your weight will work against you. On top of it, if the guy who swept you crash-lands you to the floor, God help you. If you are not trained to fall, this move alone could break your neck and kill/paralyze you.

I've been at the receiving end of a sweep and was lucky to escape with just a sprained neck that lasted a couple of days. Had the reflex not to let my head thud on the ground. Otherwise I'd have passed out.

UAC is fast, jerky & contrary to the way your body normally moves. Very very dangerous.

Lalmohan wrote:cool... lets put a go-pro in every single house and room in the country!

Respectfully, I never said “a camera in every single house and room in the country”.

But let’s be realistic here: We should have learned by now that these guys have a hard on for government buildings, for schools and for anything that would serve to ‘normalize’ J&K (not the whole country). On top of which, this particular building was previously attacked, but not entirely destroyed. For this reason, it should be reasonable to expect that the target remains on the enemy’s target list, and so a repeat attack on the same target should have been EXPECTED, especially when considering that the site is at once a government building, a school and intended to normalize J&K.

Them hitting the same target repeatedly also speaks of impunity, and this is a dangerous sentiment if allowed to fester in the minds of evildoers.

Now consider, “GoPro” is a branded product that films in HD, stores the video in solid state memory and is in a ruggedized and mountable housing. All of this is overblown (and over-budget) for the purpose I suggested above. If I shop online I can buy a cheap webcam for $15. Probably, something more discrete and properly installed could cost more than $15 each, but not that much more. Remember, there’s no need for high definition imagery, nor ruggedization or solid-state storage. When such items are bought by the 1000s, their price drops precipitously and this realistic cost should be weighed against the cost of the alternative (of not having CCTV inside a building that has been taken-over, as we know these terrorists are keen to do).

Further consider that terrorists might be disinclined from their takeover gambit if they knew they would be trying to hold a building that is replete with hidden cameras; because this is a much more difficult task. (Such cameras should be mounted low, so smoke would be less of a problem.)

BTW the privacy advocate in me also suggests that access to the video feeds or recordings should be limited to law enforcement investigating criminal allegations (perhaps of sexual assault in a classroom or office block); or otherwise restricted to security personnel who are trying to put-down a terrorist takeover of the building.

Re UAC, the point I am making is that in instructions to troops (not SF) I would and did caution against the type 1 gun disarm. When faced with enemy UAC should be and is last plan. That's all. It's excellent training and more should be given.

UAC does not cover bayonet , khukhri and dah ofcourse. Our troops are artists with these.

Rakesh wrote:Mihir: The nomenclature is what is wrong. If the Army calls it surgical strike, then surgical strike it is. Why call it by another name?

What defines any strike as "surgical" is the concerted effort to spare all civilians and civilian infrastructure, period. If this can be done from the air, then it's a surgical airstrike. If it can be done only on foot, then it's a surgical raid. If it requires precision arty, then it's a 'surgical strike'; provided of course, there are no civilians hurt.

When the IA said "surgical strike" and the PA didn't mention any dead civilians, they confirmed it was indeed a 'surgical strike'. That's the only way this plays. Look at the international reaction, and you'll see there's no reason for any Indian to get their lungi in a knot. The IA did what needed to be done, that's how it's been seen, internationally.

In the feudal era of Japan, when a Samurai was dismounted and had lost his weapons in battle, he was prepared to fight on even empty handed. In time, these empty-handed techniques were refined and developed into the various styles of Jiu Jitsu. As these techniques were intended for unarmed defense against armed attackers in battle, they found natural application in SF training.

Of course, you're correct that a soldier in battle is obliged to use the most efficient means of warfighting, usually armed; there are times when the sounds of weapons are damaging to the mission, and unarmed techniques may be necessary as a first resort. For this reason, UAC is essential, as both a last resort and occasionally, a first resort.

IMO Jiu Jitsu should even be mandatory for schoolgirls! (Just imagine orange-coloured Donald Trump with a black eye, and you'll see the benefit of teaching our girls especially, how to defend themselves properly.)

@Ravi Karumanchiri, Generally good comments on the video and about techniques. I'd like to add 2 paisa from my experience.

In the world of training and demonstrations, I'd politely disagree with your assertion that pain is the reason why an opponent would react to a technique. It is not the only reason. A supple/loose partner is entrusting the demonstrator to look after him. By doing so, the partner would allow fluid motion, making the demonstrator look good. The movement comes whenever there's lock/block in one joint - forcing a reaction to the motion of the demonstrator following the lock. Lock is never done in isolation and it's accompanied by motion (sometimes more complex when the same joint is subject to both). An example is when a wrist is locked and then the lock-holder has an option to twist the wrist if elbow is straight, or pull the elbow inside or outside if bent - each of these motions forces the body to move. Pain comes when you resist the move. From my many years of training I can say that an inherent trust in the partner (both ways) helps with the confidence in executing the technique properly, (not to mention, an individual's pain threshold also increases over the years).

Also, the size of the opponent is largely irrelevant to a good exponent of the technique if the larger opponent is not a practitioner himself. During my years in Japan I was, almost always, against smaller opponents. When I was beginning (or poor in technique compared to my opponents - different standards in India and Japan), I was cannon fodder. I was in a lot of pain for first few months but I trusted them with my life. I had the pleasure of having many good training partners, as they all wanted to test their skill against a bigger opponent. But as I got better, it became difficult for even 4th,5th,6th dan opponents to 'beat' me - though in the end their superior technique and decades of experience prevailed many times.

This first thing a practitioner learns is to be humble and be gentle with non-practitioners - in a demo environment.

RW is very different.

Added later: I like what I see about the 'volunteer' in the video. He knows about tapping and his free hand is usually in a ready position to 'tap'. There were plenty of 'break-falls'. The thing I like most is the readiness with which he gets up after each fall, indicating clearly how accustomed he's to this. A non-practitioner would be winded after couple of falls if he's not accustomed - however fit they may be. Also, here he knows he's up against a much more skillful opponent - hence the sheepish grin.

That is why I will only argue with them on the forum. Will never meet them in person

A number of members are into some serious body building. I OTOH am a textbook definition SDRE.

Ravi: Well said. It is amazing the presstitutes will claim they know better than the Army who actually conducted the operation and boldly say this was not a surgical strike. The Army does military operations for a living. If surgical strike is what they called it, then surgical strike it is. That is like a patient who had open heart surgery - states that it was not his heart that was faulty, but rather his kidneys. So he tells everyone that he had a kidney transplant.

Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar said whether cross-LoC surgical strikes were undertaken by the army in the past only the military will know as no "message" about such assaults were conveyed. "What FS said is that the key issue is that we went public after conducting the surgical strikes which conveyed a politico-military message. Whether any previous crossings had been done only the army would know. But it is irrelevant anyway because there was no message," sources in the government said. The clarification about what transpired at a meeting of the Parliamentary Committee on External Affairs, which was briefed on the strikes by Jaishankar, came after some opposition MPs quoted him having said the army had carried out "target specific, limited-calibre, counter-terrorist operations" across the LoC in the past too but this was for the first time the government had gone public about it.

Jaishankar also told the Committee that while India has been engaging with Pakistan post the September 29 surgical strikes, but no "calendar" has so far been prepared regarding future engagement and its level with Islamabad, members said on condition of anonymity. He said soon after the operations had ended, the Director General Military Operations of the Pakistan Army was informed about the strikes. During the two-and-a-half-hour meeting, Vice Chief of Army Staff Lt Gen Bipin Rawat also gave details of the strikes targeting terrorist launch pads across the LoC.

Government representatives told the panel that the strikes have fulfilled the purpose as of now and there will always be a nagging doubt in the Pakistani establishment whether India will carry out similar operations in the future. A Congress member wanted to know whether similar operations could be carried out in the future. The government representatives said the strikes were carried out after a "lot has been suffered". When asked about the casualty they could inflict on the terrorists, the officials said the army had crossed the LoC to carry out strikes and not to collect evidence.

...

Jaishankar sought to skirt the issue of UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan stating that it did not witness any action at LoC during the surgical strikes. He said since panel chairman Shashi Tharoor had been associated with the body, he would not like to say anything. During the meeting, there was a brief exchange of words between a BJP and Left party member when the former raised the issue of security of MPs after the strikes. Some members said the topic of the meeting was national security and not individual security. Special Secretary Internal Security M K Singhla informed the panel about the types of security being extended to the VIPs

Re ten article above 'left MP asking about security if MPs after strikes' - in no other country on the planet will this question come up. These are our biggest enemies the ********. Reminds me of a conversation I had once with a Cong Rajya Sabha MP and ex mayor of a leading South Indian city. I told the person that 'you guys can keep extending a protective bubble over yourselves and your kith and Kim but as time passes and your progeny grow a and goes off to do different things and the world becomes ever more dangerous because of your mistakes your meat and dear Ines will share the same fate as the rest of us. So the only protection is doing the right thing for all Indians '

The best solution to all our problems - corruption , infrastructure and security is to remove all privileges of all VIPs. You see how in less than a few years the country will be transformed. Get them to share the fate of the rest of us.